Gun liability bill in the Colorado legislature (2 letters)

We are a nation of litigation with a tabloid mentality. It is all about the fame and blame game. The past horrific events have drawn reflection and attention to gun laws and mental health. Reasoned debate is welcome. Mental health issues, including substance use disorders, need an overdue examination. As for guns, to ban or not to ban is one question.

Vincent Carroll speaks of the “game of roulette known as the tort system.” In the tort liability system, there is costly and constant spinning with doubtful outcomes. The tort system has its own arsenal of intimidating weapons. We live with concern about possible lawsuits.

Letter-writer Robert Andrew of Littleton (March 6) says, “The problem with this country is the fact there is no longer any sense of personal responsibility.” Liberty and freedom are linked to personal responsibility. This is a fact for gun owners and for all.

Merlyn Karst, Denver

This letter was published online only.

Is Vincent Carroll stewing over what he might as well call firearm profiling? I’ve gotten over the criminal intent implied by the law towards me every time I’m searched before boarding a flight at DIA. And I’m not offended that I could be held liable as a car owner, homeowner, or person in charge of serving alcohol or tobacco in my house. This proposed bill is all about responsibility — in response to an ongoing crisis. Unlike Carroll, I’m not concerned about responsible gun owners maybe taking offense at the language of a law trying to address this crisis. I want our lawmakers to step up and do something.

Joseph T. Gude, Denver

This letter was published online only.

For information on how to send a letter to the editor, click here. Follow DPLetters on Twitter to receive updates about new letters to the editor when they’re posted.

Joseph, I don’t think the issue for gun owners is one of responsibility. The overwhelming amount of gun owners are very responsible. But we are a litigious society propped up by a tort system that only favors trial lawyers. We need a system whereby the plaintiff has to pay if they file a law suit that has little merit and they lose. AM I SAYING GET RID OF LAW SUITS!!!!! No, no, no, no. But a law that allows someone to sue someone else or a company because a gun was used to commit a crime or someone accidentally shoots themselves is not a good thing.

We agree the majority of gun owners are very responsible and that at least you don’t want to do away with torte reform (even the smarter conservative knows not to give up his rights!), but you might be OD’ing on the right wing kool aid which highlights frivolous lawsuits awarded, and not the average lawsuit which restores justice to a person harmed – when the regular laws and justice system fails.

thor

Why are common sense things, like being against frivolous law suits, only looked at as right-wing ideas. Can’t common sense ideas belong to everyone?

so. . . if a car manufacturer designs and manufacturers a car with defective brakes and your family is killed as a result, that’s YOUR personal responsibility to have known better about this product? The car wasn’t “designed” to kill people, but transport people, but became a risk and deadly because of it’s design. So a manufacturer who is “allowed” by law, to design and produce military-style deadly weaponry designed to kill large quantities of people, effectively. . . then it’s just personal responsibility of the buyer to protect you from this weapon? There but for the grace of God. . .

primafacie

Manufacturer fault or negligence is very different from user fault or negligence. Not comparable.

primafacie

Manufacturer fault or negligence is very different from user fault or negligence. Not comparable.

bleeth

Liberty and freedom are indeed linked to personal repsonsibility as Mr. Karst states.

It’s wrong to blame the manufacturer of a gun on ANY crime comitted by someone that purchased or otherwise aquired on of their products. The only person responsible for the Aurora theatre massacre is in jail. The person responsible for the Sandy Hook massacre is dead. Yet the gun grabbers still want to limit the rights of law abiding citizens with legislation that won’t do a darn thing to curb the mentally ill or criminals from getting their hands on guns.

primafacie

“Liberty and freedom are linked to personal responsibility. This is a fact for gun owners and for all.”

===

And the gun owner or user who commits a crime is held liable. We already do that, Mr. Karst.

toohip

and a bartender who serves a client too much alchohol can be held liable for what the client does while drunk. What happened to that “personal responsibility?” In the Post today – a guy who was “visiting friends” left his Kil-Tech semi-auto hand gun out on this night table with three young children to access. Numerous other guns were found in the apt. A 3 year old picked up and shot his 5 year old brother point blank and killed him. The guy was convicted of negligent child abuse resulting in death and is serving 16 years in prison for his “lack of personal responsibility.” When the law fails to hold people “accountable for personal responsibility” – torte law offers the victims a form of justice. You design and manufacture a military assault weapon wannbe, that was designed to kill as many “enemies” as effectively possible and sell it without “personal responsibility” to the public – including people who aren’t screened for mental health issues – and then have a manufacturer serve these types of gun owners with high capacity magazines (read Magpul) with up to 100 rounds capacity that even the military find “excessive.” . . . and there are no laws to regulate the manufacture of such deadly “military-style” weaponry. . then we’re left with torte law to hold the manufacturer responsible for their “personal responsibility” for creating such deadly weaponry, primarily designed. . to kill people.

primafacie

I think that’s what I said, a criminal is held liable for his actions. You added what I failed to note, that the negligent is also held liable. What the letter writer is suggesting is yet another layer on top of that, which strikes me as superfluous.

GregoryR

I think it’s interesting that the broad concensus here on the boards from both left and right (and just about every other political affiliation) is that Morse’s bill is simply a bad idea.

toohip

A man thrown in jail for “alleged” drunk driving. . he wasn’t even prosecuted! – was thrown into solitary confinement for over two years, and suffered immeasurable health and mental health issues, that he now requires medial assistance and is dying of lung cancer, successfully sued the New Mexico local gov’t for this abuse and won $15,5 million – which even the gov’t would not make him whole for what they did to him, and admitted it will be a lesson for them to learn and prevent in the future. THIS is an example of why we need torte law!

guest

Are you saying being in solitary confinement gave him lung cancer? That doesn’t sound right.

Guidelines: The Post welcomes letters up to 150 words on topics of general interest. Letters must include full name, home address, day and evening phone numbers, and may be edited for length, grammar and accuracy.